International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication ISSN: 2321-8169

Volume: 5 Issue: 12 110 – 116

_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Comparative Analysis of GPSR and GPVR Protocol for Various Parameters in
VANET with Power Control
Bhumika Mehta Dr. Raghuvinder
M. Tech Scholar, DCSA Assistant Professor, DCSA
Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa
Sirsa, India Sirsa, India
bhumii91@gmail.com raghuvinder.bhardwaj@gmail.com

Abstract: Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks (VANETs) are deployed to make communication between vehicles possible using ad hoc wireless
devices. Nowadays, these networks have become an emerging technology due to the variety of their applications in Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS). By creating a vehicular network, each vehicle can exchange information to inform drivers in other vehicles about the current
status of the traffic flow or the existence of a dangerous situation. They can also be used to improve traffic management conditions such as route
optimization, flow congestion control and to provide on-board infotainment such as Internet access, the location of free parking places, video
streaming sharing, etc. GPSR protocol utilized for wireless sensor networks in base paper. First of all various parameters must be take care for
whom our research would revolve and then finding the demerit of existing protocol. By analyzing the problem of existed protocol a new protocol
need to be designed. In our dissertation work GPVR (Greedy Perimeter Vector Routing) protocol is designed. After that various parameters like
throughput, end to end delay, packet loss ratio and energy would be compared of both protocols that is existed one and proposed one. In our
research work GPSR protocol is enhanced by using position vector calculation and simple redundancy elimination. After analyzing results of
both protocols, finally we came to the conclusion that proposed protocol that is GPVR performs better. This research work carried out in NS2
software because it is peril and menacing free, In simulation various possibility can be made regarding smash of vehicles, in rural and urban
area. So computer simulation is very crucial in VANET research. VANET Simulation extended into two parts that is traffic simulation and
Network simulation

Keywords- VANET, ITS, GPVR, GPSR, Throughput, Delay

__________________________________________________*****_________________________________________________

I. INTRODUCTION
VANETs, which are made up of mobile nodes (vehicles), can
be considered as a special case of MANETs. Both of them are
distinguish by the activity and methodicalness of the nodes,
but definitely some distinguish characteristics are there which
differentiate them for example topologies used in system and
network infrastructure components. Figure 1 shows the
possible domains that a VANET network consists of. These
include the Ad hoc, infrastructure and Internet domains [2].
This figure also shows the different forms of communication
in such networks. First one known as inter-vehicle
communication through which in ad hoc manner different
vehicles can transmit information with each other. Second
domain in which exchange of information among vehicle-to-
roadside, the RSUs5 are used as access points to connect
moving vehicles to the network infrastructure which is
connected to the Internet [1] [5] and hybrid communication Figure l an overview of a VANET network
that combines between two types of previous communications.
Moreover, a vehicle can communicate with the Internet MANET consist nodes which are mobile in nature and also
directly through Hotspot devices installed along the road. The interconnect themselves in as decentralized way and also
networks that interconnect vehicles on road are called initiate multi-hop routes [4]. For example if moving nodes are
Vehicular Ad hoc Networks (VANETs). considered as bus, cars, this is known as VANET”. The main
motive of current research in VANETs is to enhance vehicle
protection with help of IVC [6]. So many different kinds of
applications are provided by VANETs. Out of these
application safety applications is one of important to make
110
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication
Volume: 5 Issue: 12
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
driving much safer, mobile commerce and other useful data
that help drivers about congestion, driving hazards, accidents,
traffic jams.
Figure 2 VANET Applications
VANETs have so many different features as compared to
MANETs, First one in VANET nodes move at high velocity
that why topology changes frequently. VANETs are also
vulnerable to various attacks. Therefore, the security of
VANETs is robust. In VANET huge majority of nodes are
vehicles. Besides this there is much other organization that
performs operations in these kinds of networks [12].
Figure 3 VANET Model
As shown above in VANET architecture communicating
nodes are of two type vehicles and base stations. Vehicles can
be of two types private or public. On other hand base stations
facility provided by government or any another private vendor
As shown below in figure vehicles can transmit information
each other and also with RSU interchangeably.
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN: 2321-8169
110 – 116
Figure 4 Schematic Representation of VANET
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
Recent advances in wireless communications and networks
have given birth to a new type of mobile network known as a
VANET to improve road safety and efficiency. VANET
technology uses wireless LAN, ad hoc technology and moving
cars as nodes to achieve intelligent inter-vehicle
communications. VANETs are distinguished from other kinds
of MANETs2 by high node mobility with constrained
movements, ample energy and computing power and hybrid
network architectures [10]. In the following, we detail their
features and communication architectures as well as research
and standardization activities in this field.
Figure 5 Flow Chart of evolution of VANET
In recent years, continuous progress in wireless
communication has opened a new research field in computer
networks. Now a day’s wireless ad-hoc networking is an
emerging research technology that needs attention of the
industry people and the academicians [9]. A vehicular ad-hoc
network uses vehicles as mobile nodes to create mobility in a
111
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication
Volume: 5 Issue: 12
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
network. Simulation is the reproduction of the method of real-
world practices. The computer simulation runs on a single or a
network of computers to model and reproduce the behavior of
a system. This is based upon the conceptual model to simulate
the system. In VANET, vehicles can transmit information with
each other and also with that unit which lies on road that is
known as RSU. Protection is a very crucial concern for many
VANET applications [3] [7]. There is a Sybil attack which is
very harmful, against ad hoc networks in which attacker by
wrong doing can claim huge identities. In these types of
networks, data of the actual time position of nodes is a
supposition fabricated by most protocols. This is a very
sensible belief, that GPS receivers can be installed easily in
vehicles [8]. Right now so many vehicles come into market
with this latest technology. In this technique each RSU
determine and stores various parameter value after getting the
inspiration packets from vehicles which are located nearby to
them [11].
III. METHODOLOGY
A. Base Work
ISSN: 2321-8169
110 – 116
Algorithm
l. Here create a road topology with the help of node in ns2.35.
2. Every node maintains a neighboring list based on the latest
data collected after regular interval of time. Information
messages are passed to each one-hop neighbor. If a node
unable to get messages or data from one neighbor during time
period, then that link will be considered as down.
3. For route estimation a graph G(V, E) theory is used to
consisting of a road intersections or junctions v∈V and road
segments e∈E here every segments are connected with the
intersections.
Optimal Route Selection:
Procedure l: route discovery
Input: ID of source node S and Destination node D
Outputs: optimal route from source to destination
Begin
if (ID D = ID N )
Forward packet to D;

Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) Else

Determine the rectangle restricted searching area;
The Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing is depending on exact
positioning of the routers and every node has access to a searching_area = [Xmin , Xmax , Xmin, Xmax];
location service and position coordinates must be known. broadcast RREQ to D in the searching_area;
GPSR makes greedy forwarding decisions which are based
upon data of a router’s immediate neighbours in the network Activate (BROADCAST_TIMER);
topology. The best next hop is considered the neighbour node Calculate route probability of connectivity and packet delay;
with the least distance from the destination. When the greedy
if (p max – p other > E)
forwarding is impossible, the algorithm recovers by routing
around the perimeter of the region. return route with the probability of connectivity pmax;
else
B. Proposed Work
delete routes with the probability of connectivity p other < p
Greedy Perimeter Coordinator Routing (GPVR) max – p threshold;
Greedy Perimeter Vector Routing (GPCR) is a position-based return route with packet delay d min;
routing protocol. The main plan of GPVR is to take advantage end if
of the fact that streets and junctions form a natural planar
graph, without any help of global information for example end if
static street map. GPVR protocol having two parts: First one is End of Route Discovery
restricted greedy forwarding procedure and second one is
Next-Hop selection
repair strategies which depend upon topology of actual-world
streets and junctions and no requirement of any specific Procedure 2: Next-Hop selection
algorithm. As we know that junction are those points where Inputs: positions and speed of the neighbours
execution of actual routing carried out. It must be kept in mind
that packets which contain information must be forwarded to a Outputs: The optimal next-hop forwarding node
node on a junction and not being forwarded across a junction. begin
A coordinator broadcasts its role along with its position
do
information. Assume for a very first step that every node
knows whether it is located in the area of a junction or not. if (D forwarding_road_segment = D current_road_segment)
else
112
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication ISSN: 2321-8169
Volume: 5 Issue: 12 110 – 116
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
forward to the N intersection_node;
else
forward the packet directly to its farthest N neighboring_node;
while (forwarding node is not destination node);
forward packet to destination node;
end if
end if
end while
End of Next-hop Selection

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULT

Software NS-2: Network Simulator 2 toll is very an open

source network simulation tool. NS2 tool is discrete, object
oriented and event driven simulator and it is written in Figure 7 Producing Road Side Unit, Destination and Source
following two languages that is C++ and Otcl. Network point
simulator mainly used in network researches and its primary
function is to simulate different types of wide area networks,
wired network and wireless network. The performance of
Energy Efficient based Cluster protocol in WSN is being
estimated with the help of simulation on network simulator-2.
Results will be determined with help of .awk script. Using the
output we plotted the bar graphs of following parameters .The
result is carried out by NS-2 Simulator using following
Parameters.

(A) Throughput: The aggregate throughput is the total number

of bytes received at the destination divided by the total time
duration. This aggregates all the flows in the network.

(B) Packet Delivery Ratio: The packet delivery percentage

represents the percentage of total sent packets from source
nodes, which are successfully received at the destination Figure 8 Start of Communication using CH in VANET
nodes. (C) Routing Overhead: The measure of routing packets (non-
data) generated by the protocol.

(D). Average End to End Delay: The end-to-end delay is the

averaged results of how long it takes a packet to go from the
source to the destination.

For this a system is required with UBUNTU version l2.04 and

CPU of INTEL (R) Core2 Duo l.80GHz with RAM 3GB

Table l: Configuration Parameters of in NS-2 Simulator

PARAMETERS VALUES

OPERATING SYSTEM Linux (UBUNTU l2.04)

NS-2 VERSION NS-2.35 for IEEE 802.llExt

NO. OF VEHIClES l0, 20, 30, 40,50

Figure 6 Starts of Communication and Cluster Head

113
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication ISSN: 2321-8169
Volume: 5 Issue: 12 110 – 116
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
NUMBER OF ROAD
4
SEGMENTS
SPEED OF VEHIClES 20 m/s
RADIO PROPAGATION
Propagation/Two Way Ground
MODEl
NETWORK INTERFACE
Physical/WirelessPhyExts
TYPE
PACKET SIZE 5l2

TRAFFIC TYPE UDP/CBR

SIMUlATION TIME l00s

ANTENNA TYPE Omni-Antenna

TRANSMISSION RANGE l000*l000 m

ROUTING PROTOCOl
GPVR
(PROPOSED)
Figure l1 Comparison of Average Delay between GPSR
&GPVR protocol

Figure 9 Comparison of Throughput between GPSR &GPVR Figure 12 Comparison of Energy between GPSR &GPVR
protocol protocol

Figure 10 Comparison of PDR between GPSR &GPVR

Figure l3 GPVR protocol End-to-End Delay of l0 to 50
protocol
Nodes

114
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication
Volume: 5 Issue: 12
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Figure l4 GPVR protocol Overhead of l0 to 50 Nodes
Figure l5 GPVR protocol Packet Delivery Ratio of l0 to 50
Nodes
Figure l6 GPVR protocol Throughputs of l0 to 50 Nodes
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN: 2321-8169
110 – 116
V. CONCLUSION
Vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANET) are established to make
communication between vehicles possible using ad hoc
wireless devices. With pace of time, these networks have
become a latest technology due to vast applications in different
system like in intelligent transportation systems. VANET is
special case of MANET. In our research work existed protocol
that is GPSR and proposed protocol both are implanted
successfully for different parameters for example end-to-end
delay, throughput, packet delivery ratio and routing overhead
for different node. In our work l0 to 50 nodes are examined
and these parameters are calculated for both protocols. After
carrying out simulated result in NS2 finally deep analysis
carried out about these two protocols that are GPSR and
GPVR which one is better. The performance has been
evaluated based on parameters that aim to figure out the
effects of routing protocols. Finally we came across a
conclusion that GPVR protocol having very low routing
overhead. Out of these GPVR protocol is far better than GPSR
protocol. GPVR perform better in terms of mobility, traffic
load and network size as compared to GPSR.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
With a deep sense of gratitude and heartiest honor, I would
like to express my immense thanks to Mr. Rajeev Dhanda,
Assistant Professor, Panipat Institute of Engineering and
Technology, Samalkha for providing me all the facilities,
valuable and sustained guidance, constant encouragement and
careful supervision during the entire span of time which made
the research successful.
REFERENCES
[1] M.-C. Chuang and M. C. Chen, “Deep: Density-aware
emergency message extension protocol for VANETs,” IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. l2, pp. 2926–
2940, 20l3
[2] Y.-C. Tseng, S.-Y. Ni, Y.-S. Chen, and J.-P. Sheu, “The
broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc network,” in
Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Mobile
Computing and Networking (MOBICOM), l999, pp. l53–l67
[3] F. Farnoud and S. Valaee, “Reliable broadcast of safety
messages in vehicular ad hoc networks,” in Proceedings of the
IEEE INFOCOM, the Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE
Computer and Communications Societies, 2009, pp. 226–234.
[4] L. Zhang, B. Hassanabadi, and S. Valaee, “Cooperative positive
orthogonal code-based forwarding for multi-hop vehicular
networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications,
vol. l3, pp. 39l4–3925, 20l4
[5] Y. Bi, H. Zhao, and X. Shen, “A directional broadcast protocol
for emergency message exchange in inter-vehicle
communications,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International
Conference on Communications (ICC), 2009, pp. l–5.
[6] Y. Bi, L. X. Cai, H. Zhao, X. Shen, and H. Zhao, “Efficient and
reliable broadcast in inter vehicle communication networks: A
115
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication ISSN: 2321-8169
Volume: 5 Issue: 12 110 – 116
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
cross layer approach,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular [10] J. Sahoo, E. H.-K. Wu, P. K. Sahu, and M. Gerla, “Binary-
Technology, vol. 59, pp. 2404–24l7, 20l0. partition assisted MAC-layer broadcast for emergency message
[7] F. Khan, Y. Chang, S. Park, and J. Copeland, “Towards dissemination in vanets,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
guaranteed delivery of safety messages in VANETs,” in Transportation Systems, vol. l2, pp. 757–770, 20ll.
Proceedings of the IEEE Global Telecommunications [11] C. Suthaputchakun, M. Dianati, and Z. Sun, “Trinary partitioned
Conference (GLOBECOM), 20l2, pp. 207– 2l3. blackburst-based broadcast protocol for time-critical emergency
[8] E. Fasolo, A. Zanella, and M. Zorzi, “An effective broadcast message dissemination in VANETs,” IEEE Transactions on
scheme for alert message propagation in vehicular ad hoc Vehicular Technology, vol. 63, pp. 2926–2940, 20l4
networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference [12] Tee, C.A.T.H.; lee, A.C.R., “Survey of position based routing
on Communications (ICC), 2006, pp. 3960–3965. for Inter Vehicle Communication system”, Distributed
[9] G. Korkmaz, E. Ekici, and F. Ozguner, “Black-burst-based Framework and Applications, 2008. DFmA 2008. First
multi-hop broadcast protocols for vehicular networks,” IEEE International Conference on, pp.l74-l82, 2l-22 Oct. 2008
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 56, pp. 3l59–3l67,
2007

116
IJRITCC | December 2017, Available @ http://www.ijritcc.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________